Treaty Of Dardanos

The Treaty of Dardanos was concluded in 85 BC between Lucius Cornelius Sulla, commander of the Roman forces in the East, and Mithridates VI Eupator, king of Pontus. It formally ended the First Mithridatic War, a conflict sparked by Mithridates’ rapid expansion into Roman spheres of influence and his brief domination of Asia Minor and parts of mainland Greece. The agreement marked a decisive reassertion of Roman authority in the Aegean world and restored much of the political landscape that had existed before hostilities began.

Military Context and Defeat of Mithridates

The negotiations at Dardanos followed a series of decisive Roman victories:

• Battle of Chaeronea (86 BC): Sulla’s forces inflicted severe losses on Mithridatic armies in Boeotia.
• Battle of Orchomenus (86 BC): A second major defeat broke Mithridates’ capacity to continue campaigning in Greece.
• Battle of Tenedos (86 BC): A Rhodian and Roman-aligned naval victory re-established control over the Aegean Sea, cutting Mithridates off from vital maritime support.

With his army weakened and his political position deteriorating, Mithridates sought terms that would avoid total destruction of his kingdom. Sulla, pressed by political turmoil in Rome and needing to return west, was willing to negotiate but insisted on unconditional obedience to Roman authority.

Terms of the Agreement

The treaty, negotiated near the ruins of ancient Dardanos in the Troad, imposed significant territorial, financial and political conditions:

• Territorial restoration: Mithridates was required to abandon all conquests made since the outbreak of war. He surrendered his control over:
  • Mainland Greek territories and Aegean islands
  • The provinces of Bithynia, Phrygia, Paphlagonia and Cappadocia

  This restored the pre-war arrangement in Asia Minor and reaffirmed Roman oversight of the region.

• Indemnities: Mithridates had to pay 2,000 talents from his personal treasury. In addition, the provinces he relinquished were collectively required to pay an enormous indemnity of 20,000 talents, described as roughly equivalent to twenty years of export revenue.
• Recognition of Roman authority: Mithridates remained king of Pontus but was compelled to submit to Roman diplomatic supremacy, implicitly accepting Sulla’s right to dictate settlement conditions.

These measures ensured Pontus’ continued existence as a client kingdom but removed its capacity to challenge Roman dominance in the Aegean and Anatolia.

Implications for Greece and Asia Minor

The treaty restored Roman control over Greece, which had suffered greatly during the conflict. Cities such as Athens, which had aligned with Mithridates, were compelled to pay heavy reparations and forfeited what remained of their traditional civic liberties. The settlement effectively reinforced the dependence of Greek cities on Roman authority.
In Asia Minor, the return to the earlier territorial configuration strengthened Rome’s allied states and emphasised its position as the arbiter of regional affairs. However, the political and economic burdens of the indemnities contributed to long-term instability.

Political Significance

Although the treaty re-established a fragile peace, it did not eliminate the rivalry between Pontus and Rome. Mithridates VI would later reorganise his forces, leading to renewed conflict in the Second and Third Mithridatic Wars. For Sulla, the agreement provided the opportunity to return to Italy, where he soon embarked on his campaign to seize power in Rome.